The warrant was issued late on Friday, said Karin Rosander, communications head at Sweden's prosecutors' office.

Swedish police have been trying to contact Mr Assange, but have not yet been able to, she told the BBC.

Wikileaks, criticised for leaking Afghan war documents, quoted him saying the charges were "without basis".

The message, which appeared on Twitter and was attributed directly to Mr Assange, said the appearance of the allegations "at this moment is deeply disturbing".

In a series of other messages posted on the Wikileaks Twitter feed, the whistle-blowing website said: "No-one here has been contacted by Swedish police", and that it had been warned to expect "dirty tricks".

More documents due

Last month, Wikileaks published more than 90,000 secret US military documents on the war in Afghanistan.

US authorities criticised the leak, saying it could put the lives of coalition soldiers and Afghans, especially informers, at risk.

Mr Assange has said that Wikileaks is intending to release a further 15,000 documents in the coming weeks.

Ms Rosander said there were two separate allegations against Mr Assange, one of rape and the other of molestation.

She gave no details of the accusations. She said that as far as she knew they related to alleged incidents that took place in Sweden.

Media reports say Mr Assange was in Sweden last week to talk about his work and defend the decision by Wikileaks to publish the Afghan war logs.

The allegations were first reported in the Swedish newspaper Expressen.

Wikileaks founder Julian Assange said in an interview published on Sunday that he believes the Pentagon could be behind a rape accusation against him that was later dropped by Swedish prosecutors.

The country's prosecution service meanwhile justified the chaotic situation when authorities first issued an arrest warrant for the Australian whistleblower late on Friday night but then withdrew it the following day.

The Aftonbladet newspaper quoted Assange, 39, as saying he did not know who was "hiding behind" the claims, which came amid a stand-off with Washington over the website's publication of secret Afghan war documents.

Assange said he was shocked by the allegations against him and that he had never had sexual relations with anybody in a way that was not consensual, the tabloid said.

But he said that he had been warned previously that groups such as the Pentagon "could use dirty tricks" to destroy Wikileaks -- adding that he had been particularly warned against being entrapped by sexual scandals.
Story continues below...

Assange told Aftonbladet that despite the lifting of the warrant, his enemies would still use the claims to damage Wikileaks, which is set to publish thousands more secret papers about the war in Afghanistan in coming weeks.

He refused to give more details about the two women whose claims sparked the furor, saying that it would impinge on their privacy.

Prosecutors said Saturday that Assange was now "not suspected of rape" and was no longer wanted for questioning on the charge, but added that an investigation into a separate molestation charge remained open.

Assange, Wikileaks website and his aides have strongly denied all the claims.

He had been in Sweden earlier this month giving a press conference on the upcoming release of the last batch of Afghanistan documents, but he generally remains on the move around the world staying with supporters.

The Swedish prosecutor's office issued a statement on Sunday defending its actions.

It said that chief prosecutor Eva Finne, who was responsible for withdrawing the arrest warrant, had "more information available to decide on Saturday than the duty prosecutor on Friday evening."

"A decision regarding restrictive measures, such as this, must always be reevaluated in a preliminary inquiry," the statement added.

The spokeswoman for the prosecutor's office, Karin Rosander, told AFP late Saturday that the procedure followed was normal and would have been launched automatically by the duty prosecutor in serious cases such as rape.

In an interview in the Expressen newspaper, which broke the story, duty prosecutor Maria Haljebo Kjellstrand said that she "did not regret her decision".

The two women who originally made the claims did not make an official complaint and it was the police who took the decision to inform the prosecutors office, she said.

"I received a report from the police which seemed to me to be sufficient to arrest him. On Friday evening I got a call from the police describing what the women said. The information I received was convincing enough for me to take my decision," Hljebo Kjellstrand was quoted as saying.

WikiLeaks has already released nearly 77,000 secret papers about the war against the Taliban and Al-Qaeda in Afghanistan, sparking charges that it had endangered the lives of informants and others named therein.

The website says it had repeatedly asked the Pentagon for help analyzing the remaining documents, and Assange has said he wants to avoid publishing the "names of innocent parties that are under reasonable threat".

Not 'obvious' IMO.
Nothing is in the world of intelligence whistleblowing websites.
The dark side would love to have a leak site and Wikileaks is certainly a candidate.
Trust Wikileaks and Assange at your peril.
We are living in a world of covert and sophisticated war making propaganda where the control of such a site could be crucial.

Britain's role in the alleged torture and unlawful killing of Iraqi civilians may be the subject of legal action following the publication of nearly 400,000 leaked military documents by the website WikiLeaks.

WikiLeaks document dump appears to have been a carefully prepared plan to stage a limited hangout as bait to sell US justification for the war with Iran. WikiLeaks provided documents about torture and beatings which was already known information, in essence, the "bait."

But recall that rat poison is 90% good food, and the ten percent that kills you is the real purpose behind the tasty food, and in the case of WikiLeaks, the poison inside the tasty bait are the claims that most Iraqis have been killed by other Iraqis and that Iran is the reason the US is unable to win the war. Both these claims serve the American propaganda cause and clearly there is ample reason to doubt them.

In the present case, however, Assange and the US Government may have hoisted with their own petard because the public is ignoring the intended message and focusing on the confirmation of the torture allegations. Much of the public still did not want to believe that the US Government was carrying our torture on a scale to rival the Nazis. This document dump, although containing information which was already known to those who were paying attention, has triggered a backlash of lawyers and even the United Nations, who now understand they must be seen to address these war crimes by the US and British Government.

And Ray McGovern praises his work. I don't think any of us will knock Ray McGovern._________________'And he (the devil) said to him: To thee will I give all this power, and the glory of them; for to me they are delivered, and to whom I will, I give them'. Luke IV 5-7.

IRAQS SECRET WAR FILES 1-4 [HQ]
by Syed Shoeb (videos) http://www.facebook.com/video/video.php?v=164760813553033
15:00
Dispatches, Channel 4's flagship current affairs strand, exposes the full and unreported horror of the Iraqi conflict and its aftermath, revealing the true scale of civilian casualties; and allegations that after the scandal of Abu Ghraib, American soldiers continued to abuse prisoners; and that US forces did not systematically intervene in the torture and murder of detainees by the Iraqi security services. The programme also features previously unreported material of insurgents being killed while trying to surrender.

Channel 4 is the only UK broadcaster to have been given access to nearly 400,000 secret military significant activities reports (SIGACTS) logged by the US military in Iraq between 2004 and 2009. These reports tell the story of the war and occupation which the US military did not want the world to know.

Quote:

Oh dear Channel 4 what are you doing?
This video contains content from Channel 4, who has blocked it in your country on copyright grounds.

Alex talks with author, journalist, speaker and radio talk show host Webster Tarpley about the Wikileaks Afghanistan documents and the latest developments on the coming conflict with Iran. Tarpley is the author of Obama: The Postmodern Coup and Barack H. Obama: The Unauthorized Biography, both available at Alex's Infowars store.

While it’s been proven that the winner of this year’s Nobel Peace Prize – Liu Xiaobo – is and has been for many years on NED’s payroll, and NED officially boasts about funding the Solidarity movement in Poland in the 1980s, taking over CIA’s covert work with more overt means, the jury’s still out on whether the WikiLeaks project is also really a NED front.

Read more + comment at 9/11 Truth Norway._________________> this is a crisis i knew had to come
> destroying the balance i'd kept
> turning around to the next set of lies
> wondering what will come next
[ passover / joy division ]

While it’s been proven that the winner of this year’s Nobel Peace Prize – Liu Xiaobo – is and has been for many years on NED’s payroll, and NED officially boasts about funding the Solidarity movement in Poland in the 1980s, taking over CIA’s covert work with more overt means, the jury’s still out on whether the WikiLeaks project is also really a NED front.

_________________--
'Suppression of truth, human spirit and the holy chord of justice never works long-term. Something the suppressors never get.' David Southwell
http://aangirfan.blogspot.comhttp://aanirfan.blogspot.com
Martin Van Creveld: Let me quote General Moshe Dayan: "Israel must be like a mad dog, too dangerous to bother."
Martin Van Creveld: I'll quote Henry Kissinger: "In campaigns like this the antiterror forces lose, because they don't win, and the rebels win by not losing."

Global Intelligence Files – more than five million emails from the Texas-headquartered "global intelligence" company Stratfor. The emails date from between July 2004 and late December 2011. They reveal the inner workings of a company that fronts as an intelligence publisher, but provides confidential intelligence services to large corporations, such as Bhopal’s Dow Chemical Co., Lockheed Martin, Northrop Grumman, Raytheon and government agencies, including the US Department of Homeland Security, the US Marines and the US Defense Intelligence Agency. The emails show Stratfor’s web of informers, pay-off structure, payment-laundering techniques and psychological methods, for example :

"[Y]ou have to take control of him. Control means financial, sexual or psychological control... This is intended to start our conversation on your next phase" – CEO George Friedman to Stratfor analyst Reva Bhalla on 6 December 2011, on how to exploit an Israeli intelligence informant providing information on the medical condition of the President of Venezuala, Hugo Chavez.

The material contains privileged information about the US government’s attacks against Julian Assange and WikiLeaks and Stratfor’s own attempts to subvert WikiLeaks. There are more than 4,000 emails mentioning WikiLeaks or Julian Assange. The emails also expose the revolving door that operates in private intelligence companies in the United States. Government and diplomatic sources from around the world give Stratfor advance knowledge of global politics and events in exchange for money. The Global Intelligence Files exposes how Stratfor has recruited a global network of informants who are paid via Swiss banks accounts and pre-paid credit cards. Stratfor has a mix of covert and overt informants, which includes government employees, embassy staff and journalists around the world.

The material shows how a private intelligence agency works, and how they target individuals for their corporate and government clients. For example, Stratfor monitored and analysed the online activities of Bhopal activists, including the "Yes Men", for the US chemical giant Dow Chemical. The activists seek redress for the 1984 Dow Chemical/Union Carbide gas disaster in Bhopal, India. The disaster led to thousands of deaths, injuries in more than half a million people, and lasting environmental damage.

Stratfor has realised that its routine use of secret cash bribes to get information from insiders is risky. In August 2011, Stratfor CEO George Friedman confidentially told his employees : "We are retaining a law firm to create a policy for Stratfor on the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act. I don’t plan to do the perp walk and I don’t want anyone here doing it either."

Stratfor’s use of insiders for intelligence soon turned into a money-making scheme of questionable legality. The emails show that in 2009 then-Goldman Sachs Managing Director Shea Morenz and Stratfor CEO George Friedman hatched an idea to "utilise the intelligence" it was pulling in from its insider network to start up a captive strategic investment fund. CEO George Friedman explained in a confidential August 2011 document, marked DO NOT SHARE OR DISCUSS : "What StratCap will do is use our Stratfor’s intelligence and analysis to trade in a range of geopolitical instruments, particularly government bonds, currencies and the like". The emails show that in 2011 Goldman Sach’s Morenz invested "substantially" more than $4million and joined Stratfor’s board of directors. Throughout 2011, a complex offshore share structure extending as far as South Africa was erected, designed to make StratCap appear to be legally independent. But, confidentially, Friedman told StratFor staff : "Do not think of StratCap as an outside organisation. It will be integral... It will be useful to you if, for the sake of convenience, you think of it as another aspect of Stratfor and Shea as another executive in Stratfor... we are already working on mock portfolios and trades". StratCap is due to launch in 2012.

The Stratfor emails reveal a company that cultivates close ties with US government agencies and employs former US government staff. It is preparing the 3-year Forecast for the Commandant of the US Marine Corps, and it trains US marines and "other government intelligence agencies" in "becoming government Stratfors". Stratfor’s Vice-President for Intelligence, Fred Burton, was formerly a special agent with the US State Department’s Diplomatic Security Service and was their Deputy Chief of the counterterrorism division. Despite the governmental ties, Stratfor and similar companies operate in complete secrecy with no political oversight or accountability. Stratfor claims that it operates "without ideology, agenda or national bias", yet the emails reveal private intelligence staff who align themselves closely with US government policies and channel tips to the Mossad – including through an information mule in the Israeli newspaper Haaretz, Yossi Melman, who conspired with Guardian journalist David Leigh to secretly, and in violation of WikiLeaks’ contract with the Guardian, move WikiLeaks US diplomatic cables to Israel.

Ironically, considering the present circumstances, Stratfor was trying to get into what it called the leak-focused "gravy train" that sprung up after WikiLeaks’ Afghanistan disclosures :

"[Is it] possible for us to get some of that ’leak-focused’ gravy train ? This is an obvious fear sale, so that’s a good thing. And we have something to offer that the IT security companies don’t, mainly our focus on counter-intelligence and surveillance that Fred and Stick know better than anyone on the planet... Could we develop some ideas and procedures on the idea of ´leak-focused’ network security that focuses on preventing one’s own employees from leaking sensitive information... In fact, I’m not so sure this is an IT problem that requires an IT solution."

Like WikiLeaks’ diplomatic cables, much of the significance of the emails will be revealed over the coming weeks, as our coalition and the public search through them and discover connections. Readers will find that whereas large numbers of Stratfor’s subscribers and clients work in the US military and intelligence agencies, Stratfor gave a complimentary membership to the controversial Pakistan general Hamid Gul, former head of Pakistan’s ISI intelligence service, who, according to US diplomatic cables, planned an IED attack on international forces in Afghanistan in 2006. Readers will discover Stratfor’s internal email classification system that codes correspondence according to categories such as ’alpha’, ’tactical’ and ’secure’. The correspondence also contains code names for people of particular interest such as ’Hizzies’ (members of Hezbollah), or ’Adogg’ (Mahmoud Ahmedinejad).

Stratfor did secret deals with dozens of media organisations and journalists – from Reuters to the Kiev Post. The list of Stratfor’s "Confederation Partners", whom Stratfor internally referred to as its "Confed * House" are included in the release. While it is acceptable for journalists to swap information or be paid by other media organisations, because Stratfor is a private intelligence organisation that services governments and private clients these relationships are corrupt or corrupting.

WikiLeaks has also obtained Stratfor’s list of informants and, in many cases, records of its payoffs, including $1,200 a month paid to the informant "Geronimo" , handled by Stratfor’s Former State Department agent Fred Burton.

WikiLeaks has built an investigative partnership with more than 25 media organisations and activists to inform the public about this huge body of documents. The organisations were provided access to a sophisticated investigative database developed by WikiLeaks and together with WikiLeaks are conducting journalistic evaluations of these emails. Important revelations discovered using this system will appear in the media in the coming weeks, together with the gradual release of the source documents.

END

Public partners in the investigation
Comment
Current WikiLeaks status
How to read the data

Public partners in the investigation:

More than 25 media partners (others will be disclosed after their first publication) :

An extrajudicial blockade imposed by VISA, MasterCard, PayPal, Bank of America, and Western Union that is designed to destroy WikiLeaks has been in place since December 2010. The EU Commission is considering whether it will open a formal investigation, but two lawsuits have been filed (http://wikileaks.org/Banking-Blocka...). There are also other ways to donate (https://shop.wikileaks.org/donate). It is legal to donate, including in the United States. The US Treasury has publicly stated that that there are no grounds to place WikiLeaks on a US government blacklist.

WikiLeaks Founder and Publisher Julian Assange has not been charged with any crime in any country. Four prosecutors are currently trying to charge him under the Espionage Act of 1917 before a closed Grand Jury in Virginia, in the United States. Julian Assange has been detained for 447 days (10,728 hours) since Dec 7, 2010, without charge, and he is currently awaiting a decision from the UK Supreme Court on extradition to Sweden (http://www.justiceforassange.com/Su...). The decision is expected in March. The decision on whether he will be onwardly extradited to the US lies in the hands of the Swedish Executive, but Sweden’s Prime Minister Fredrik Reinfeldt has refused to state whether he will protect Assange from a politically motivated extradition to the United States (http://justice4assange.com/US-Extra... ).

An alleged WikiLeaks US military source, Bradley Manning, has been in pre-trial detention for 639 days (http://bradleymanning.org/ ). His arraignment took place on 24 February 2012. In December 2011, Manning’s attorney revealed in the preliminary hearing that the US government is attempting to enter a plea deal with Manning in order to "go after" Assange. Manning has 22 charges against him, including violating the Espionage Act of 1917 and aiding the enemy. Manning has deferred entering a plea. Julian Assange and WikiLeaks are legally represented in the Manning hearings by the US Centre for Constitutional Rights (http://ccrjustice.org/ ). WikiLeaks was denied full access to Manning’s hearing after appeal (http://ccrjustice.org/newsroom/pres... ). WikiLeaks put out a statement relating to Manning’s trial ahead of the Article 32 Hearing : (http://www.wikileaks.org/Statement-... ).

The alleged WikiLeaks-supporting hacktivists known as the "PayPal 14" were arrested in 2011 following co-ordinated online demonstrations against the financial services companies that are carrying out the unlawful financial blockade on WikiLeaks (VISA, MasterCard, Paypal, Western Union, Bank of America). They are represented by attorney Stanley Cohen and will go before court in May 2012 (http://www.cyberguerrilla.org/?p=4644 ).

WikiLeaks is about to launch a distributed, encrypted "Facebook for revolutionaries" (https://wlfriends.org/ ).

Julian Assange is currently directing interviews, from house arrest, for a programme on the future of the world that is syndicated to various broadcasters. The first show will be broadcast in March (http://www.wikileaks.org/New-Assang... )

HOW TO READ THE DATA

This is a glossary and information on how to understand the internal terms and codes used by Stratfor in their emails. It is not a complete list. We call on the public to add to this list by tweeting #gifind

To see a list of the terms George Friedman considers useful for his staff to know please download this PDF : The Stratfor Glossary of Useful, Baffling and Strange Intelligence Terms.

OPEN SOURCE VS. "COVERT"

As you browse through the content, you will notice that a large set of it is what is classified as "open source" (subject lines which include [OS]). These are basically email threads that start with someone posting a published and accessible source, such as news sites, and follow with commentary by the staff. In one of the emails, Joseph Nye is referenced saying :

"Open source intelligence is the outer pieces of the jigsaw puzzle, without which one can neither begin nor complete the puzzle"

CODES IN SUBJECT LINES

Many of the emails have codes in the subject lines as well as in the body, to make it easier for the staff to "quickly identify when we need to go back and have a look-see." [*] :

Please refer to the glossary for the code names of subject and country tags, as well as mailing list names.

SOURCE CODES

A lot of interesting stuff comes from "sources". Sources are either informal contacts or people they have a formal relationship with. The IDs for sources have the format of CN120 or ME001. In terms of the character part, it refers to a region or a country :

When "insights" are sent, they usually have the following header information :

SOURCE : The ID of the source, say CN123. Sometimes this is left "no source ID" when it’s a new source.

ATTRIBUTION : How the source is to be attributed, i.e. "Source in the pharma distribution industry in China", Stratfor source, etc.

SOURCE DESCRIPTION : Describes the source, for example : "Source works with Mercator Pharmaceutical Solutions, distributing pharma to developing countries." These include concrete details on the source for internal consumption so that there’s a better understanding on the source’s background and ability to make assessments on the ground.

PUBLICATION : Yes or No. If the option is yes it doesn’t mean that it would be published, but rather that it _can_ be published.

SOURCE RELIABILITY : A/B

SOURCE RELIABILITY : A-F, A being the best and F being the worst. This grades the turnaround time of this source in responding to requests.

ITEM CREDIBILITY : 1-10, 1 being the best and 10 being the worst (we may change the range here in the future). this changes a lot based on the info provided. 1 is "you can take this to the bank" and 10 would be an example of maybe - "this is a totally ridiculous rumor but something that is spreading on the ground"

SPECIAL HANDLING : often this is "none" but it may be something like, "if you use this we need to be sure not to mention the part about XXX in the publication" or any other special notes

SOURCE HANDLER : the person who can take follow-up questions and communicate with the source.

Hizzies or HZ - Hizbollah Izzies or IZ - Israel A-dogg - Mahmoud Ahmadinajad, Iranian President Baby bashar - Bashar Al-Assad, Syrian President Uncle Mo - Moammar Gaddhafi ADP- Analyst Development Program. Four-month program at STRATFOR from which candidates— mostly recent college graduates— are selected for hire. Strictly protect and protect - Often mentioned in the ’subject’, means that the source is protected. Played- A term used for procuring sensitive information from sources. E.g. from one of the secure list messages circulating the ’complete scenario for the Israeli team in Centcom’s war game,’ the analyst who procured the data wrote : "I played the head of the Mossad which was great fun." Excomm- Appears to be ’executive committee’ of STRATFOR.

Attached documents can be searched by Filename or part of the file name. Preliminary searches for filenames using the terms ’lists’, ’source lists’ or ’insight lists’, coupled with the names of source handlers (e.g. Reva for Turkey, Brazil or Venezuela) produced Excel lists of the source names, contact info and source descriptions which correspond to the source codes (e.g. ME1315).

Sourcing Criteria

The following are the proposed criteria for analyzing both sources and insight.

Source Timeliness : This is the average grade on how long this particular source turns around tasks and replies to inquiries. It may change but is more of a static indicator.

Source Accessibility : Accessibility weighs the source’s position to have certain knowledge in a particular field. So, for example, if we are looking for energy insight and the source is an official in an energy agency, his or her Accessibility would be ranked higher than if s/he was a banker giving insight on energy. While we would welcome a banker giving his/her insight, a good source may not have a high accessibility ranking if they aren’t in a position to offer reliable insight on a certain topic. The source’s access to decision makers, specific training or education in the desired topic area, specific knowledge of events/situations/incidents can also be considered.

Source Availability : How often can we go to this source ? Are they someone we can tap daily, weekly, monthly, yearly ?

Insight Credibility : This is our assessment of the veracity of the insight offered. Here we need to consider whether or not this is disinformation, speculation, correct data or knowledgeable interpretation. Any bias that the source is displaying or any specific viewpoints or personal background the source is using in the assessment provided should also be considered.

Insight Uniqueness : Is this insight something that could be found in OS ? If it is but the analysis of the information is unique, it would still have a high uniqueness ranking. Or, if it is concrete data, but is something that is only offered to industry insiders, i.e. stats that aren’t published but that aren’t secret, it would still have a high uniqueness score.

Scoring

All of the above factors will be scored on an A-F scale, with A being exemplary and F being useless.

Source Timeliness : A = turnaround within 24 hours B = turnaround within 48 hours C = turnaround within a week D = turnaround within a month F = lucky to receive a reply at all

Source Accessibility : A = Someone with intimate knowledge of the particular insight B = Someone within the industry but whose knowledge of the topic is not exact (e.g. if we were asking someone in the oil industry about natural gas) C = Someone working close to the industry who doesn’t have intimate knowledge of a particular topic but can speak to it intelligently (e.g. a financial consultant asked to gauge the movement of the stock market) D = Someone who may know a country but doesn’t have any concrete insight into a particular topic but can offer rumors and discussions heard on the topic F = Someone who has no knowledge of a particular industry at all

Source Availability : A = Available pretty much whenever B = Can tap around once a week C = Can tap about once a month D = Can tap only several times a year F = Very limited availability

Insight Credibility : A = We can take this information to the bank B = Good insight but maybe not entirely precise C = Insight is only partially true D = There may be some interest in the insight, but it is mostly false or just pure speculation. F = Likely to be disinformation

Insight Uniqueness : A = Can’t be found anywhere else B = Can only be found in limited circles C = Insight can be found in OS, but the source has an interesting take/analysis D = Insight can be found in OS, but still may not be common knowledge F = Insight is accessible in numerous locations

Daily Insight Scoring

SOURCE : code ATTRIBUTION : this is what we should say if we use this info in a publication, e.g. STRATFOR source/source in the medical industry/source on the ground, etc SOURCE DESCRIPTION : this is where we put the more concrete details of the source for our internal consumption so we can better understand the source’s background and ability to make the assessments in the insight. PUBLICATION : Yes or no. If you put yes it doesn’t mean that we will publish it, but only that we can publish it. SOURCE RELIABILITY : A-F. A being the best and F being the worst. This grades the source overall - access to information, timeliness, availability, etc. In short, how good is this source ? ITEM CREDIBILITY : A-F. A = we can take this info to the bank ; B = Good insight but maybe not entirely precise ; C = Insight is only partially true ; D = There may be some interest in the insight, but it is mostly false or just pure speculation ; F = Likely to be disinformation. SPECIAL HANDLING : often this is "none" but it may be something like, "if you use this we need to be sure not to mention the part about XXX in thepublication" or any other special notes SOURCE HANDLER : the person who can take follow-up questions and communicate with the source.

_________________'Come and see the violence inherent in the system.
Help, help, I'm being repressed!'

“The more you tighten your grip, the more Star Systems will slip through your fingers.”

On Monday February 27th, 2012, WikiLeaks began publishing The Global Intelligence Files, over five million e-mails from the Texas headquartered "global intelligence" company Stratfor. The e-mails date between July 2004 and late December 2011. They reveal the inner workings of a company that fronts as an intelligence publisher, but provides confidential intelligence services to large corporations, such as Bhopal's Dow Chemical Co., Lockheed Martin, Northrop Grumman, Raytheon and government agencies, including the US Department of Homeland Security, the US Marines and the US Defence Intelligence Agency. The emails show Stratfor's web of informers, pay-off structure, payment laundering techniques and psychological methods.

Supporters of WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange, stand with a long banner that reads "The first casualty of war is truth" outside the Supreme Court in central London on 1 February 2012 on the first day of his appeal against extradition. (Photo: AFP - Miguel Medina)
By: Yazan al-Saadi
Published Monday, February 27, 2012
The leak of over five million emails from the US-based intelligence firm Stratfor, including information about credit card details, passwords, and the identities of sources, sheds new light on the rapidly changing world of intelligence gathering and exposes those behind it. Al-Akhbar gained access to the data obtained and published by WikiLeaks, including sensitive material pertaining to the Middle East.

◙ Browse through emails referenced in this article

The Strategic Forecasting Inc., commonly known as Stratfor, is a private firm dealing in the lucrative business of intelligence gathering and assessment.

Founded in 1996, the company gained global prominence during the NATO bombing of Kosovo in 1999 when its seemingly cutting-edge analysis was publicized by various news agencies. But it was the events of 9/11 and the subsequent “war on terrorism” that elevated the stature of the firm, turning it into a highly sought after informant for major Western media organizations like Bloomberg, Associated Press, Reuters, The New York Times, and the BBC.

Commonly referred to as the private CIA, Stratfor claims that it gathers its intelligence through a number of publicly accessible sources, such as wire services, chat hubs, and other Internet sites, unclassified government studies, in addition to well-placed sources internationally. The agency now boasts close to 300 thousand subscribers and over 2 million recipients of free email updates.

Until recently, much of the inner workings of Stratfor had been shrouded in mystery. But last December, members of the hacking cooperative LulzSec, an offshoot of the increasingly popular group Anonymous, hacked into the system during the 'LulzXmas' campaign to highlight the plight of Bradley Manning, an American soldier currently incarcerated by the US government for suspicion of passing on information to WikiLeaks.

Preliminary readings of these new emails gradually shed light on how the institution is structured, the process of bringing and building up sources, and an intriguing insight into how employees interact with each other. Notably, and contrary to the impression Stratfor tries to project, the emails reveal a corporation that has organizational issues, at times shockingly uninformed, and over-dependent on certain sources in manufacturing their predictions that are highly coveted.

What is Stratfor?

Stratfor was founded over a decade ago in Austin, Texas by George Friedman, a former political science professor. Friedman is the company’s chief intelligence officer, financial overseer, and CEO.

Presenting himself as a “best selling author” on the company’s About Us page, Friedman has a history of working on matters of security and defense with the American military, as well as other institutions like the notorious RAND Corporation.

A self-proclaimed disciple of neo-conservative icons like Leo Strauss, Friedman has routinely emphasizes the 'jihadist threat' of al-Qaeda. Indeed, the (1) forecast report compiled by members of Stratfor for the decade between 2005 and 2015 is mainly concerned with the prominence of the United States as a global hegemonic power and its conflict with al-Qaeda.

Sources are indispensable for Stratfor to operate. They are the lifeline for the think-tank, whether acquaintances of a Stratfor employee or highly placed individuals.Friedman's wife, Meredith Friedman, is actively involved in the operations of the think-tank. She is Chief International Officer and vice-president of Communications. From the emails, it seems her role is to expand Stratfor's public relations network, setting up events and interviews for her husband with the media, as well as academic and political personalities. Moreover, Meredith organizes the international wing of Stratfor, where employees are sent off to conferences overseas.
Fred Burton, Stratfor's vice-president for Counter-terrorism and Corporate Security, makes up the final component in leadership of the think-tank. He was a special agent with the US Diplomatic Security Service and was appointed by Washington to investigate the assassination of Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin, the assassination of Rabbi Meir Kahane, and a number of bomb plots by al-Qaeda prior to 9/11.

Burton has clear pro-Israeli sentiments with links to the Israeli military and intelligence sectors. In one email discussion regarding the Gaza Freedom Flotilla, Burton, adopting the Israeli narrative, argues that the flotilla was funded by questionable sources.

Sources: The Double-edged Sword

Certainly, some type of relationship exists between Stratfor and official security agencies, particularly within the United States. A number of internal emails circulated within Stratfor have (2) attachments of internal, albeit unclassified, documents from the FBI and other agencies. Digging further within the leaked emails may provide more concrete evidence of such a direct link.

The organization is structured like a pyramid. At the top, as noted, are the Friedmans and Burton who make the decisions. Below them are Watch Officers (WOs) who comb over the various sources of intelligence for any significant value. Next are Analysts, also at times called “handlers,” they are employees that discuss and scrutinize intelligence, and tasked to find, collect, and build up relations with individuals in order to exploit information. Finally, at the base are sources. (See details in box below).

Sources are indispensable for Stratfor to operate. They are the lifeline for the think-tank, whether acquaintances of a Stratfor employee or highly placed individuals.

Sources are rated with basic grading (3) scale, with “A” denoting the best, and “F” denoting the worst. They are also (4) coded according to the region or topic they represent and are assigned a number.

However, the internal emails of Stratfor suggest a level of (5) frustration, and at times confusion, in terms of employees following through with regulations. It was only in last April that an overall source review process took place. Following the email trends for this review, one can sense frustration by those tasked with getting the source lists together. In one case, a source list was mistakenly leaked into the OS list.

There is a total disconnect to actual realities and vast complexities of the regions and topics they cover.In one email exchange between Anya Alfano, who works as a briefer, and Meredith Friedman, Alfano outlined an (6) overview of the source review process. The overview suggests Stratfor is not as informed as it would like others to think. Most sources are located in particular countries and are not available region-wide nor are they spread in a variety of sectors. Stratfor’s major source in the Middle East, codenamed ME1, is a case in point.
According to various emails, ME1 has been actively involved with Stratfor as far back as 2006, maybe even earlier. It seems that the source is someone from the Lebanese military, has a good grasp of English, and seems to be a major supplier of a number of other sources for Stratfor that apparently include college students to Hamas members, a number of Arab diplomats in Lebanon, and others.

The importance of ME1 is further highlighted by a (7) pay increase he received in October 2011, bringing his salary to $6,000 per month. The ( wire transfer list for 2011 shows that ME1 is the third highest paid source.

The confidence in ME1 is reflected in two emails. The (9) first shows that members of Stratfor believe they have “journalist contacts (editors) for pretty much every Lebanese media agency of any significance via ME1.” The (10) second, and perhaps the one that exemplifies the lack of actual knowledge by members of Stratfor and their over-reliance on outsourcing intelligence gathering, shows a debate regarding the sectarian identity of Assef Shawkat, the Syrian deputy Minister of Defense and husband of Bushra Assad, and Ali Mamlouk, the Syrian General Intelligence Director. Despite 'Open-Source' (OS) information detailing that Shawkat and Mamlouk are Sunnis, as one analyst points out, ME1's handler Reva Bhalla firmly writes back, “I trust ME1 on this question. I hate this region, aaaaargh.”

Behind Stratfor's Hype

Putting aside the obviously embarrassing and damaging security breach for an institution that thrives on the need for privacy of sources, the general knowledge of the employees seemed to be filtered through a specific paradigm.

Stratfor is an institution that is ideologically based on neo-conservative ideas of pragmatism. There is an underlying sense of delight for the global power projected by the United States, and its allies. More pointedly, there is a total disconnect to actual realities and vast complexities of the regions and topics they cover. The analysis and discussion regarding the Middle East is most noteworthy in this regard.

Many of the internal documents forwarded around are from Western or Israeli agencies.For members of Stratfor, a Palestinian editor is deemed a (11) “nut job” for expressing his belief that Jerusalem will be liberated through “military honor.” In contrast, despite (12) clear racism exhibited by an Israeli army intelligence officer towards Arabs, his comments still have value. What is more telling in the email regarding the officer, is the admission by the analyst that Stratfor is similar to the Israel Defense Intelligence office because they both are “disconnected with domestic policies” of the regions they deal with.
Most of the employees have a fleeting understanding of the topics they cover. It seems that analysts are tasked with topics that they commonly have no background in. In an informal (13) email exchange, aside from the questionable jests by the parties regarding AIDS, the first line transcribed lets on that the analyst placed in charge of Latin America is not actually an expert on the region, yet was still able to gather intelligence to the satisfaction of her superiors.

Furthermore, many of the internal documents forwarded around are from Western or Israeli agencies, rather than from other sources in the region, which reinforces the disconnection within Stratfor.

Stratfor has been a critical tool for various western media agencies and intelligence organizations. The light shown into the secretive corporate intelligence entity presents a partial explanation of why western media agencies and intelligence organizations have persistently failed to understand non-Western societies. Most of the analytical thinking developed within organizations like Stratfor and then distributed on a wide scale is defined by a narrow narrative, which does not truly capture the complexities and sentiments of individuals living in the region nor its vibrant political, economic, and social structures.

The video in which Friedman introduces Stratfor’s work to potential clients gives the opposite impression. Friedman dismisses the Washington-based culture of policy papers that, as he put it, no one reads. Boasting about the superiority of intelligence to journalism, an unassuming but confident Friedman argues that journalism is “backward-looking” while intelligence is all about the “why” and what is “going out happen.” Little did Friedman know that looking-back at the way his organization operates by journalists around the world today will tell us a lot more about the “why” he is after, and will affect what will happen next to intelligence gathering in the Middle East, and beyond.

In future articles starting next week, Al-Akhbar will examine the workings and findings of Stratfor in the Middle East.
Stratfor's Emails

Stratfor is a corporate think-tank that is concerned with accumulating intelligence that is internally assessed, discussed, and graded. Most of the information relates to military, political, and economic matters, and email is a primary tool for knowledge exchange amongst its staff.

The intelligence extracted from sources is usually compared with publicly accessible data, termed Open-Source (OS), and then incorporated in various assessments and reports to publicize. This is shared with a public news subscribers list, tailored according to the subscriber’s regional interest or subscription package.

Internally, Stratfor depends heavily on mailing lists in its communications. From the privileged “alpha” list to the “analysts” list to regional team list such as “MESA,” “LATAM,” and “Eurasia,” each piece of intelligence is shared through specific channels for processing.

The company has a number of departments dealing with compiling information. Currently, there are more than 130 employees at the the think-tank. Many of the employees have more than one operational position. For example, Jennifer Richmond is the China Director and Director of International Projects. The emails reveal that she played, and possibly still does, an administrative role as well, trying to organize and coordinate source lists for evaluations and labors to ensure that employees follow through with the (14) insight scoring criteria.

Speed is key in the Stratfor’s intelligence game and the role of Watch Officers (WOs) is essential. They act as “objective source evaluators” who comment on information given by sources and compare it with what is publicly available. As one employee termed them during an internal email discussion, WOs “hold (15) the family jewels of the company.” This department is headed by Michael Wilson.

Analysts are the next crucial cog in the machine. Analysts are expected to collect sources, categorize them along lines of reliability, timeliness, accessibility/position, credibility and uniqueness of insights provided. How they recruit sources varies, but mainly the source is painstakingly (16) charmed into cooperation.

Described as “handlers,” analysts have a direct connection with the source and their priority is ensuring that the relationship continues.

Additionally, analysts with Stratfor are expected to interact with subscribers to extract further information and groom possible sources for future use. This is clear in one email exchange in which a lower-level tactical analyst outlines how he has developed a new source, an individual within an unnamed German security office who had been a subscriber to Stratfor for over nine years.

Tactical analysts within Stratfor are mainly concerned with observing and commenting on military, intelligence, and other security operations within the United States and beyond. Scott Stewart, Vice-president of Tactical Intelligence and affectionately dubbed “Stick,” heads the department.

WikiLeaks has started publishing more than five million emails hacked by Anonymous from the servers of Stratfor, a US intelligence gathering company.

An email sent by Chris Farnham, senior officer for Stratfor, to an internal unnamed source inside the company titled "Israel/Iran Barak Hails Munitions Blast in Iran" provides details about who would benefit from an Israeli attack on Iran, and say such a plan would be motivated by economic factors.
According to the email, sent on November 13, 2011, supporters of an Israeli-led attack are Russia, India and Saudi Arabia, while the EU and China stand against such plans, mainly for economic reasons.

"Not many people know that Russia is one of Israel's largest military partners and India is Israel's largest client. If a direct conflict between Iran and Israel erupts, Russia and Saudi Arabia will gain the advantages on oil increasing prices. On the other hand, China and Europe are expected to lose from an oil crisis as a result of a conflict," the email says
Farnham said that an attack on the Iranian nuclear facilities would last only 48 hours and be so devastating it would lead to regime change.
"Based on Israeli plans, the attack on Iran will last only 48 hours but will be so destructive that Iran will be unable to retaliate or recover and the government will fall. It is hard to believe that Hamas or Hezbollah will try to get involved in this conflict," Farham wrote.
The Stratfor analyst then reveals that despite claims propagated in the media, an attack on Iran is unlikely since Israeli commandos have already targeted major parts of Iran's nuclear programme.
"In the open media many are pushing and expecting Israel to launch a massive attack on Iran. Even if the Israelis have the capabilities and are ready to attack by air, sea and land, there is no need to attack the nuclear programme at this point after the commandos destroyed a significant part of it."
Farnham said an attack would be motivated by economic factors rather than Iran's nuclear programme.
"If a massive attack on Iran happens soon, then the attack will have political and oil reasons and not nuclear. It is also very hard to believe that the Israelis will initiate an attack unless they act as a contractor for other nations or if Iran or its proxies attack first," the email concludes.
WikiLeaks Publishes Stratfor Emails Hacked by Anonymous
http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/articles/305015/20120227/wikileaks-anonymous- assange-stratfor-emails.htm
The WikiLeaks GiFiles: Stratfor Says Attack on Iran a Euro Crisis Diversion
http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/topics/detail/842/wikileaks/
The Wikileaks GiFiles: Stratfor Monitored Bhopal Activists Yes Men
http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/articles/305080/20120227/stratfor-wikileaks-g ifiles-bhopal-yes-men-dow.htm
The Wikileaks GiFiles: Stratfor Plotted with Goldman Sachs to Set Up Investment Fund
http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/articles/305032/20120227/gifiles-anonymous-wi kileaks-stratfor-goldman-sachs.htm

Subscriber Info
George Friedman on Email Theft and the Wikileaks Release

Quote:

Transcript:

I'm George Friedman, founder and CEO of Stratfor.

As most of you know, in December thieves hacked into Stratfor data systems and stole a large number of company emails, as well as private information of Stratfor subscribers and friends. Today Wikileaks is publishing the emails that were stolen in December. This is a deplorable, unfortunate -- and illegal -- breach of privacy.

Some of the emails may be forged or altered to include inaccuracies. Some may be authentic. We will not validate either, nor will we explain the thinking that went into them. Having had our property stolen, we will not be victimized twice by submitting to questions about them.

The disclosure of these emails does not mean that there has been another hack of Stratfor's computer and data systems. Those systems, which we have rebuilt with enhanced security measures, remain secure and protected.

The release of these emails is, however, a direct attack on Stratfor. This is another attempt to silence and intimidate the company, and one we reject. As you can see, emails sent to many people about my resignation were clearly forged.

We do not know what else has been manufactured. Stratfor will not be silenced, and we will continue to publish the geopolitical analysis our friends and subscribers have come to rely on.

As we have said before, Stratfor has worked to build good sources in many countries around the world, as any publisher of geopolitical analysis would do.

We are proud of the relationships we have built, which help our analysts better understand the issues in many of these countries through the eyes of people who live there.

We have developed these relationships with individuals and partnerships with local media in a straightforward manner, and we are committed to meeting the highest standards of professional and ethical conduct.

Stratfor is not a government organization, not is it affiliated with any government. The emails are private property. Like all private emails, they were written casually, with no expectation that anyone other than the sender and recipient would ever see them. And clearly, as with my supposed resignation letter, some of the emails may be fabricated or altered.

Stratfor understands that this hack and the fallout from it have created serious difficulties for our subscribers, friends and employees. We again apologize for this incident, and we deeply appreciate the loyalty that has been shown to Stratfor since last year's hack.

We want to assure everyone that Stratfor is recovering from the hack. We will continue to do what we do best: produce and publish independent analysis of international affairs. And we will be back in full operation in the coming weeks. We look forward to continuing to serve you.

_________________'Come and see the violence inherent in the system.
Help, help, I'm being repressed!'

“The more you tighten your grip, the more Star Systems will slip through your fingers.”

The Global Intelligence Files exposes how Stratfor has recruited a global network of informants who are paid via Swiss banks accounts and pre-paid credit cards.

Who are their spies?

Government and diplomatic sources from around the world give Stratfor advance knowledge of global politics and events in exchange for money. Stratfor has a mix of covert and overt informants, which includes government employees, embassy staff and journalists around the world.

How they control their sources

"[Y]ou have to take control of him. Control means financial, sexual or psychological control... This is intended to start our conversation on your next phase" – CEO George Friedman to Stratfor analyst Reva Bhalla on 6 December 2011, on how to exploit an Israeli intelligence informant providing information on the medical condition of the President of Venezuala, Hugo Chavez.

Using secret information to make money in financial markets

Stratfor's use of insiders for intelligence soon turned into a money-making scheme of questionable legality. The emails show that in 2009 then-Goldman Sachs Managing Director Shea Morenz and Stratfor CEO George Friedman hatched an idea to "utilise the intelligence" it was pulling in from its insider network to start up a captive strategic investment fund. [...] CEO George Friedman explained in a confidential August 2011 document, marked DO NOT SHARE OR DISCUSS: "What StratCap will do is use our Stratfor's intelligence and analysis to trade in a range of geopolitical instruments, particularly government bonds, currencies and the like".

US Government and Mossad ties

Stratfor claims that it operates "without ideology, agenda or national bias", yet the emails reveal private intelligence staff who align themselves closely with US government policies and channel tips to the Mossad – including through an information mule in the Israeli newspaper Haaretz, Yossi Melman, who conspired with Guardian journalist David Leigh to secretly, and in violation of WikiLeaks' contract with the Guardian, move WikiLeaks US diplomatic cables to Israel.

Secret deals with media organizations and journalists

Stratfor did secret deals with dozens of media organisations and journalists – from Reuters to the Kiev Post. The list of Stratfor's "Confederation Partners", whom Stratfor internally referred to as its "Confed * House" are included in the release. While it is acceptable for journalists to swap information or be paid by other media organisations, because Stratfor is a private intelligence organisation that services governments and private clients these relationships are corrupt or corrupting.

Quote:

How does Stratfor feel about Assange and Anonymous? "These * should get the death sentence, along with their hero Julian Assange.”

One of the first juicy bits to trickle out of Wikileaks release of 5 million Stratfor emails is the comment from Fred Burton, Stratfor’s Vice President of Intelligence, that the Imam of the controversial so-called Ground Zero mosque is an “FBI operational asset.” Burton, who was formerly a special agent with the US State Department’s Diplomatic Security Service and the Deputy Chief of their counterterrorism division, made the comment on an email chain regarding a New York Observer article, Untangling the Bizarre CIA Links to the Ground Zero Mosque. The controversy surrounding the “Ground Zero mosque” overwhelmingly dominated the news and discussion surrounding the ninth anniversary of the 9/11 attacks.

UPDATE: The above was posted about an hour after the GI Files had been announced. It seems relatively minor compared to some of the other items coming out, but still quite interesting and perhaps important. Now, 12 hours later, it’s apparent that the scope of issues involved in the GI Files release will be immense. Spying on activists, insider trading, money laundering, “sexual control” of assets and mind-boggling arrogance and incompetence seem to be only the tip of the iceberg.

Here is the full Wikileaks GI Files press conference, which took place a few hours ago:

Coca Cola Contracting Stratfor to Spy on PETAhttp://wikileaks.org/gifiles/releasedate/2012-02-27-12-coca-cola-contr acting-stratfor-to-spy-on-peta.html
On Monday February 27th, 2012, WikiLeaks began publishing The Global Intelligence Files, over five million e-mails from the Texas headquartered "global intelligence" company Stratfor. The e-mails date between July 2004 and late December 2011. They reveal the inner workings of a company that fronts as an intelligence publisher, but provides confidential intelligence services to large corporations, such as Bhopal's Dow Chemical Co., Lockheed Martin, Northrop Grumman, Raytheon and government agencies, including the US Department of Homeland Security, the US Marines and the US Defence Intelligence Agency. The emails show Stratfor's web of informers, pay-off structure, payment laundering techniques and psychological methods.

Just wondering if they do really know about 9/11 maybe they use it as a bargaining tool? Just a thought, but I do feel that it will out by sources close to these activists one day _________________'Come and see the violence inherent in the system.
Help, help, I'm being repressed!'

“The more you tighten your grip, the more Star Systems will slip through your fingers.”

Uploaded by TheGift73 on 27 Feb 2012
Wikileaks has just released over 5 million emails from the Texas-headquartered "global intelligence" company Stratfor, that were obtained via Anonymous in December 2011 (@YourAnonNews - official twitter account). Having looked through some of the emails that have been released, I can say that there will be a lot of very embarrassed faces tonight, as well as some explaining to do.

The Wikileaks servers are getting hit pretty hard at the moment, so they have also added the information to Pastebin.

Maybe it is a sting operation for an Intelligence Co that puts US interest 1st? Hmm the mind boggles. If that is a good assumption then maybe 9/11 may not out via this route._________________'Come and see the violence inherent in the system.
Help, help, I'm being repressed!'

“The more you tighten your grip, the more Star Systems will slip through your fingers.”

The disclosure was contained in e-mails from the private US security firm, Stratfor, which were published by WikiLeaks website on Monday after being obtained by the Anonymous hacking group.

Stratfor provides analysis of world affairs to major corporations, military officials and government agencies and was once likened by an American business magazine to a "shadow CIA".

According to one of the e-mails, the firm was shown the information papers collected from bin Laden's Abbotabad compound after the US special forces attack last May that resulted in his death.

The e-mail, from a Stratfor analyst, suggested that up to 12 officials in Pakistan's Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) agency knew of the al-Qaeda leader's safe house.

The internal email did not name the Pakistani officials involved but said the US could use the information as a bargaining chip in post raid negotiations with Islamabad.

American officials have always believed it was impossible for the ISI not to have known that Bin Laden was sheltering in a garrison town so close to Islamabad. Pakistan has repeatedly dismissed the charge.

"Mid to senior level ISI and Pak Mil with one retired Pak Mil General that had knowledge of the OBL arrangements and safehouse," the email said of the officers involved. "I get a very clear sense we (US intel) know names and ranks."

WikiLeaks claimed to have 5 million Stratfor emails that it would published in collaboration with media outlets. However only 200 were released in the first lot.

Other e-mails included the suggestion that Hugo Chavez, Venezuela's president, may have less than a year to live after his cancer spread to the colon and bone marrow.

Russian doctors who had been brought in to "clean up the mess" resulting from Cuban treatments for the Venezuelan leader had given a grim prognosis for his recovery, the e-mails said.

Other revelations were statements that Israel had last year carried out a successful covert attack on Iran's secret nuclear facilities.

"On the surface it presents as if it's a media organisation providing a private subscription intelligence newsletter," the activist, who is awaiting extradition to Sweden on rape charges said in London. "But underneath it is running paid informants networks."

Mr Assange also promised 5,000 emails would reveal private details of individuals who had worked or given information to the organisation.

Stratfor rejected claims that there was anything improper in the way it handled information gathered.

"Stratfor has worked to build good sources in many countries around the world, as any publisher of global geopolitical analysis would do," the company said. "We have done so in a straightforward manner and we are committed to meeting the highest standards of professional conduct.

"Having had our property stolen, we will not be victimized twice by submitting to questioning about them," the statement said.

The Texas-based subscription-based publisher providing political, economic and military analysis to help customers reduce risk.

The emails were orginally hacked last year by the network Anonymous.

We promised you those mails and now they'll finally be delivered. Five million (that's 5,000,000) emails at your pleasure," said the Anonymous account.

"There's a treasure trove of nasty details in those emails. We think there's something for everyone."

Stratfor think the third world war will be between nato and russia and break out in Poland.
But they are sort of like the BBC - limited hangout._________________--
'Suppression of truth, human spirit and the holy chord of justice never works long-term. Something the suppressors never get.' David Southwell
http://aangirfan.blogspot.comhttp://aanirfan.blogspot.com
Martin Van Creveld: Let me quote General Moshe Dayan: "Israel must be like a mad dog, too dangerous to bother."
Martin Van Creveld: I'll quote Henry Kissinger: "In campaigns like this the antiterror forces lose, because they don't win, and the rebels win by not losing."

You cannot post new topics in this forumYou cannot reply to topics in this forumYou cannot edit your posts in this forumYou cannot delete your posts in this forumYou cannot vote in polls in this forumYou cannot attach files in this forumYou can download files in this forum